Pavlin Radoslavov wrote: > Bruce M Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Pavlin Radoslavov wrote: >> >>> The reason those XLOG statements are FATAL is to capture bugs that >>> might be hiding somewhere else. >>> If you were able to trigger those statements, could you provide >>> instructions how to reproduce the problem so we can investigate it. >>> >>> >> +1. >> >> Whilst Ben's patches are well intentioned, they do not fully address the >> issues, and you correctly point out they most likely mask the underlying >> issue. >> >> There is definitely a corner case in the first situation, where vifp may >> be NULL and yet be dereferenced when is_deleted is true. This applies to >> all netlink socket processing. >> > > Yes, the NULL pointer dereferencing was a bug which is now fixed. > > >> In the second situation, it looks like the case where the FEA is told of >> a new interface event by Linux, for an interface which it doesn't know >> about, this is treated as a fatal error by the FEA. >> > > The interface event is addition of a new address to an interface. > Obviously, the kernel must first tell the FEA that an interface is > added/exists and only then the "new address" event should be send. > Hence, it is a mystery for me when/why the XLOG_FATAL() there is > triggered. It is possible that there really was a bug somewhere..and I hit this assert before that bug was fixed. Even in my code, I keep a trace message there...I'll keep an eye out for that to see if I ever see it again.
Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com _______________________________________________ Xorp-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers
